set_mixer_channel_volume

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

The description discloses the core behavior: setting a volume value, with a documented range and 0dB reference. However, there are no annotations, and the description does not mention possible clamping, side effects, or how the operation interacts with the master volume when channel_num is 0.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is extremely compact and front-loaded with the action, followed by a clean Args block. Every sentence and detail earns its place, with no filler or repetition of schema data.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a simple two-parameter setter with an output schema, the description provides nearly all necessary calling context: channel semantics, volume range, and decibel reference. It is slightly incomplete in that it does not explain when to prefer this over sibling volume tools or what happens when setting channel 0.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description fully compensates by documenting both parameters: channel_num is defined as 0=Master, and volume is given a numeric range plus the meaningful 1.0=0dB reference. These details add value far beyond the bare input schema.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description clearly states the verb and resource: 'Set the volume of a mixer channel.' This is specific enough to distinguish from track-level operations, though it does not explicitly differentiate itself from set_master_volume, especially since channel_num 0=Master overlaps with that sibling.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The resource scope 'mixer channel' implies when the tool should be used, but there is no explicit guidance about when to choose set_mixer_channel_volume over set_track_volume or set_master_volume. The special case of channel_num 0=Master is noted, but no alternatives or exclusions are mentioned.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.